(
Bumped -- kos)
Senator Feingold revealed on This Week that he will be seeking to formally censure President Bush about his violation of the Fourth Amendment, FISA, and other laws related to domestic spying. Only one President has ever been censured--Andrew Jackson, on March 28, 1834. Censure was attempted by the Democrats during Clinton's presidency as an alternative to impeachment, but, well, we know how that ended up. This is not the first motion of censure to be brought against President Bush; Conyers and other Democrats have introduced a motion to censure to the President and Vice-President over their waging and handling of the Iraq War, along with their stonewalling of Congressional investigations (H.R. 636). As for why Feingold is choosing this path:
"This conduct is right in the strike zone of the concept of high crimes and misdemeanors," said Feingold, D-Wis., a three-term senator and potential presidential contender.
He said President Bush had, "openly and almost thumbing his nose at the American people," continued the NSA domestic wiretap program. [...]
[I]n a copy of the censure resolution obtained by ABC News, Feingold asserts the president, "repeatedly misled the public prior to the public disclosure of the National Security Agency surveillance program by indicating his administration was relying on court orders to wiretap suspected terrorists inside the United States."
Senator Frist who also appeared on This Week threw a restrained hissy hit and pledged that Feingold's motion would never reach the full Senate. He also added the ubiquitous treason insinuiation by claiming Feingold's motion sends a "terrible, terrible signal" to our enemies. If you think President Bush was scared before, I'd love to be a fly on the wall of the Oval Office today.
The most obvious and immediate benefit of Feingold's statement is that it keeps Bush's illegal spying in the news. While the media has declared accountability dead after the Senate Intelligence Committee voted not to investigate the program, Feingold's motion ratchets up the heat and keeps the scandal alive. So just how would the motion to censure work? To pass in the full Senate, it would require a simple majority vote (unless it were filibustered, of course). Yet getting it to the Senate floor is Feingold's biggest problem. Frist, like Roberts and the rest of the Republican Orcs, will do whatever the President says to cover-up and whitewash this grave violation of the Constitution. So how would this resolution work? First, Feingold would introduce the resolution, likely referring it to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Alternatively, the motion could originate from the Senate Judiciary Committee. The point is that between Feingold's and his goal lays a big, fat wall of Republicans who are blindly loyal to this embattled and unpopular President, Constitution be damned. Can Feingold penetrate that wall and bring this critical issue to the floor for a vote? We'll see.
The mere fact the media is now discussing censuring the President of the United States is a huge fucking deal. Sure, the debate will center around "political stunts" and "partisan politics," as Frist alleged. But hey, if it takes a "stunt" to bring attention to one of the most egregious violations of privacy and due process perpetrated by the Executive, then bring on the stunts. Mr. Reid, shut that Senate down and force them to consider Feingold's resolution. Up or down vote, that's what's fair, right? Shut it all down and demand this yellow-bellied Congress address the fact the President broke the law.
I know there's a lot of you that think censure isn't enough. But impeachment, though appropriate, was never a practical remedy in light of the Republican-controlled Congress. Censure though may enjoy slightly broader support among Republicans with a conscience--though I admit, Feingold will be hard-pressed to find any of those in the Senate today. The beauty of Feingold's move is that it also forces Democrats to go beyond mere rhetoric. I think it goes without saying though that there better damn well be 44 co-sponsers on Feingold's resolution.
And so, Senator Feingold puts the cards on the table and forces the hand of the Senate. Each member of that body will have to go on record: Are you for an unaccountable King, or for the rule of law?
Update: Watch the video of Feingold's announcement here.